Problem with the arguments

[KabeRinnaul]

Replace religion with placebos. Giving a person a placebo and letting them believe it is medicine is proven to work. Because the person had faith that what they were taking was medicine. Since it can be proven that they are not taking medicine, does that mean the practice of using the placebo effect to treat the patient should be stopped? After all, doctors are lying to them in order to make them believe something that is not true. How is this any better than allowing someone to believe in faith when it causes no harm? Why should it be ok to believe things in the name of science but not in the name of religion?

No offense, but comparing the placebo effect and religious faith may not be the wisest choice of metaphor.

[Gravekeeper]

Ah.....this again.

Faith healing aside, studies did show that religious people are happier than non-religious people on average. I would assume due to a "Someone in your corner" sort of effect.

The only real core issue with religion is that somewhere along the line, a lot of it went from teaching to dictating. Mainly due to the influence of power, politics, money, etc. Who see religion as a tool of control. Jesus never set out to start a religion and he certainly didn't set out to create the lunacy performed in his name these days.

As a result, Abrahamic religions stand in stark contrast to other religions due to centuries of political influence, money, control, etc warping them to their own ends. Most of what we know these days as "Christian" was swiped, make up or otherwise schemed up for one purpose or another. However, the Christians that look past that and actually look at the teachings of Jesus aren't the ones that are out there being assholes and lunatics.

As for the question of a divine being, my only problem there is when religion dictates to science the parameters of said being. Even if those parameters have already been completely disproven ( Faith healing for example ). The reality is nobody can possibly know the true form of purpose of such a being and everyone is just making up what they think it is. Which is fine up until a point where that image no longer makes rational sense. Which is where I think the crux of the matter lays and where the faltering of organized religion is beginning in modern society.

It no longer makes sense to say God is a white dude with a beard sitting up in the sky watching everything you do and judging accordingly like Rapture Santa Claus. Especially given that not a single white person was involved in the origin of the religion and everything that was heralded as his work is easily explainable nowadays with modern science.

That's where the problem is and where the shift in modern religion is happening. Between those that move beyond that to try and understand how their god or gods could fit within a modern understanding.....and those that cling to the literal meaning like batshit lunatics then play one lifelong game of No True Scotsman with the rest.

Can a "divine" being exist scientifically speaking? Yes, actually. Though not in the form or manner that would fit any major religion's personal caricature of it. It would in essence be an alien intelligence.

[Panacea]

It never made sense to say God was a white dude with a beard. Jesus was Semitic, for starters, and while God is usually referred to in the male aspect there are actually passages in the Bible that use the female.

I'm pretty much agreement with what GK is saying . . . and I'm a Christian!

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

I think the white dude is a bit of a misdirect though. Most people for the most part just have a tendency to anthropomorphize god in a way that he/she looks like them. I've seen Jesus statues that were white, black, arab looking, and hispanic. I can't tell you the number of women I've known that insist that god is a she. Do these things actually matter? For (if you believe in the concept) an all powerful entity that can probably look however it feels like and oh yea, can create the universe probably not. The idea that such an entity that exists cosmically would require sex organs and look like us... well that's odd. That such an entity might choose to represent itself to us in an aesthetically pleasing way if it ever did is more plausible, in which case you're pretty much validating any representation depending on who is rendering it.

Honestly, I like the South Park version.

[Andara Bledin]

It's unlikely we could even see all that God is.

And if we could, it would likely lead to madness. But for totally different reasons than seeing Cthulhu.

Or maybe not. Who knows.

[Gravekeeper]

It's unlikely we could even see all that God is.

I think we would understand a potential it in the abstract sense. Like we understand the universe is incredibly large. Even if we can't grasp the scale first hand. But like the universe, the understanding of a god or gods would be a lifelong, generational endeavor. However, I think a lot of people be would in for a rude awakening when they discover a being on that sort of level doesn't give a rats ass to pay attention to them individually to make sure they aren't masturbating.

Personally, I would posit that given the nature of the universe skewing towards growing more complex over time, so too does life. If an afterlife exists, then it must be inhabited by consciousness that arose within that state or that transitioned from a physical state. Given the concept of reincarnation, which while the evidence for it is scant, at least there is some. The physical world would be a staging ground for the evolution of consciousness. A consciousness would return to it repeatedly in ever more complex forms until such a point as it is complex enough to exist without a physical component. In a format such as a Boltzmann brain perhaps or a quantum based awareness.

In which case the next "step" from here would likewise be populated with a new "species" of evolved consciousness. Who in turn would be on the bridge between a physical and non-physical existence and likely have a vested interest in our wellbeing. This would also fulfill the afterlife theory behind near death experiences. As with a positive NDE, the person reports being met by beings that seem to assume the guise of whatever that person believes in. Oddly enough, this is described as a stage of death in the Tibetan Book of the Dead. Which describes that at one point during the process of death you will be met by others who will assume the guise of whatever being or beings that will make you feel most comfortable. Be they gods, angels, spirits, Jesus, deceased family, etc.

On top of that, when you begin to take into account other factors with quantum research such as the multiple worlds theory, there are a numerous possibilities. Death could be a transition stage from a physical existence in this dimension to a physical existence in a different, more complex dimension that has the capability to observe and assist us in ours.

Given the seeming nature of increasing complexity of the universe, it is more likely that there is no "god" as we would ever recognize it. But instead a collective complexity possibly resulting from the increasing complexity of a mass of consciousnesses. More of a universal "divine" force if you will. Possibly a collective consciousness where each individual consciousness is knowing or unknowingly acting as a single neuron within the "brain" of "God". Given the possibility of a multiverse, each universe or dimension may have its own "God" or there may be a single infinite "God" structure that reaches across all dimensions.

Anyway, there's your scientific and philosophical food for thought for today. -.-

[s_stabeler]

on a side note, I just figure God is a combination of ALL races & genders. Why? well, if man is made in God's image, God has to be some form of combination.

[Andara Bledin]

Maybe God is an impressionist...

[Gravekeeper]

on a side note, I just figure God is a combination of ALL races & genders. Why? well, if man is made in God's image, God has to be some form of combination.

"God" would have neither race nor gender, because those are biological constructs of evolution. Being made in God's Image(tm) is merely arrogance on our part. But even if that WAS true, I would venture it would be "his" image in the sense of a capacity for compassion, intelligence, etc. Since "God" would not have a biological form to base us on.

[Mytical]

"God" would have neither race nor gender, because those are biological constructs of evolution. Being made in God's Image(tm) is merely arrogance on our part. But even if that WAS true, I would venture it would be "his" image in the sense of a capacity for compassion, intelligence, etc. Since "God" would not have a biological form to base us on.

This. I have debated both sides of the discussion. As I know I do not have all the answers, and ask questions I myself want to know the answers to. My stance is always to side with religion, but here is why.

Religion must be separated from those who follow it. As man has a tendency to interpret things their own way, and miss the important parts of a religion. They can twist the intent of the context, by taking bits and pieces out of context. People can be cruel, vicious, and evil..but that has nothing to do with the over all religion.

The extremist muslims have as much to do with the Koran (spelling?) as WBC has to do with christianity. Ie nothing at all. Or they have to do with religion what anybody who might happen to be athiest who kills somebody does with atheism. IE nothing.

Many people point out a couple of passages of either religious text and say "See that is why I could never believe in that god." not realizing that the texts were describing a time that was harsh. So MAN decided to do harsh things, and say it was ok with the higher being.

I know I am rambling, please remember I have the issue with my concentration, and I am trying to make a point, believe it or not.

I do not believe in the Christian god, or the Muslim god. I do believe there is something out there. Something that has guided the bigger picture (how the universe was formed, what life came where, etc) but doesn't concern itself on the smaller scale. IE somebody killing somebody, or such. If you were watching a billion monitors, might miss a few things now and then I am sure.

Which is to mean that they might care, but they have more on their plate then a tiny little dirtball.

Anyhow, I am up for a friendly debate with anybody, from either side. If I end up talking to a brick wall though, I grow board and move on. Because I do not have to be right, but I have to get more information then I have. No new information, and listening to a record skip, leads me nowhere.

If anybody can make heads or tales form this Shiny things OOO Squirrel..more power to them

[Gravekeeper]

I do believe there is something out there. Something that has guided the bigger picture (how the universe was formed, what life came where, etc) but doesn't concern itself on the smaller scale.

Here's some science food for thought for you: When you look at the mechanics of the grand engine that is the universe, gravity is essentially a force that creates life. Gravity takes matter and forms stars, it forms planets, it forms ice/water ( from the gasses left over from forming a star ) and ensures said ice/water is bombarded on said planets, it allows the development if biological organisms by providing a constant force that holds them in and creates a viable environment around them within which they can develop, it provides our world with the capability to create natural convection within its core that in turn creates the magnetic field that shields us from the terrible rigors of space such as solar wind. Which would otherwise rip the atmosphere right off the planet and render it lifeless.

Gravity is creation. Without gravity, nothing would exist. The universe would simply be an expanding mist of matter carried by the velocity of the big bang until the end of time itself. Gravity does all of this despite being a pretty simple little core rule: Physical matter draws physical matter.

Yet despite that, the best part being when you get right down to it, we still don't exactly know how or why gravity works. -.-

If there is or was a "God" like entity, it would need not do anything except create this one little rule in order for the entire universe and everything in it to arise from the debris of the big bang. Then sit back and watch.

[siead_lietrathua]

i dunno guys, i'm sticking with my current theory for now. if a creator god built the world with the purpose of his favoured species, designed in his image, being able to thrive and life heartily, then god must be one hell of a big cockroach.

just playing.

i kinda gave up on the "trying to figure out if there's a god" thing. it wouldn't make me change into a better or worse person, or change my day to day requirements of existence either way. so i'll float along in agnosticism because there are more immediate concerns at hand. i do belive that the human thinking that we are the whole purpose of the universe is just arrogance though. i'm sure a creator god is out there still creating, just for the fun of it.

[bara]

Gravity is creation. Without gravity, nothing would exist. The universe would simply be an expanding mist of matter carried by the velocity of the big bang until the end of time itself. Gravity does all of this despite being a pretty simple little core rule: Physical matter draws physical matter.

Not sure if it helps in your discussion, but I was watching that 'How the Universe Works' on Netflix. They mentioned that gravity alone doesn't explain how galaxies are held together. They mentioned the theory of 'dark matter' or 'dark energy'. Its been awhile since I watched it, so I can't explain it anymore than that. But here is a wiki link that explains it pretty much how I remember it being explained in the series

My only point is that there is a lot we don't know.

[Mytical]

<snip> My only point is that there is a lot we don't know.

I always put it in an analogy. We are like ants that have never left our little mound on a beach, yet think we know how the whole world works. Our little mudball isn't even a mound though, it is a grain of sand. We sit on this grain of sand, and think we know how the whole UNIVERSE works. We don't know 1% of 1% of a 1,000,000th of how things work in the rest of the universe.

[Gravekeeper]

Its been awhile since I watched it, so I can't explain it anymore than that.

Yes, in a nutshell dark matter is basically the name we give to the missing mass of the universe that we can't account for based on our current observations. We can calculate the total mass, but when we do, it doesn't add up to the sum total of matter we can see ( stars, planets, etc ) exerting a gravitational force on the universe. We can only theorize on what it is at this point, because it can't be detected by our current instruments. We detect stars, planets, etc based on the energy they emit or reflect and the force they exert.

Dark matter exerts force, but does not reflect or emit energy at all or if it does not in a significant amount. Hence we can't see it, hear it or otherwise detect it. But we can see it exerting force on the rest of the universe.

As our technology advances it may grow sensitive enough to detect it. But at present, remember we basically detect things based on them giving off ridiculous amounts of sustained energy capable of travelling millions of light years. If dark matter only gives off small amounts of energy for a few light years or is so transient that it doesn't give off sustained bursts of energy, we'd never detect it.

We don't know 1% of 1% of a 1,000,000th of how things work in the rest of the universe.

You would be surprised at how much we know, and how terrifying some of that knowledge is. The rules of the universe are, well, universal. What we're doing is trying to learn how they're fully applied and how they interact in different circumstances. The reason we even know dark matter is possibly there is because we know the structure of the universe and we can tell something is missing.

Our planet may be a grain of sand, but we can look over at the house on the beach and realize its a house, and that the roof seems to be missing.